On 10/01/2013 18:49, tim..... wrote:

"David Walters" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 13:16:08 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:
In message , at 11:10:49 on
Thu, 10 Jan 2013, David Walters remarked:

125. Nineteen stations just use lifts.

They have stairs as well.

A list I've been looking for but haven't been able to find is stations,
or platforms really, that don't have publicly accessible stairs.

I've always understood that every station with "only" lifts also has
emergency stairs (that may not be well signposted for regular use). And
also some stations still have the stairs despite now being fitted with
escalators (TCR springs to mind).

I think that is true but some stations have escalators and no fixed
stairs, assuming everything is working. The stairs at Angel still seem to
be present but I think I'd cause a disturbance if I exited the platforms
that way.

If you have a desire to avoid lifts and escalators then a lot of the
underground is off limits and it is very hard to plan a route with
available information.

I can understand why someone might want to avoid lifts,

But what possible (disability) reason is there for wanting to avoid
escalators but are able to use stairs?

As someone I know was asking just last week, in order to take a dog who
is too heavy to carry. It is VERY hard to get info on stations which
ONLY offer escalators (in order that he can avoid them).

In message

, Recliner wrote:
6. Many tube stations were used as air-raid shelters during the Second
World War, but the Central Line was even converted into a fighter aircraft
factory that stretched for over two miles, with its own railway system. Its
existence remained an official secret until the 1980s.

That would be why it's mentioned in the 1947 "A History of London
Transport", then.

13. The longest journey without change is on the Central line from West
Ruislip to Epping, and is a total of 34.1 miles.

What about Cockfosters to Cockfosters via Heathrow Terminal 4. I make
that around 95 km.

16. The TARDIS, (Dr Who’s transport) can be found outside Earl’s Court
station. Or at least an old police call box can.

It's a new one, not an old one.

21. The station with the most platforms is Baker Street with 10 (Moorgate
also has 10 platforms but only six are used by Tube trains - others are
used by overground trains).

How about Waterloo, with 26?

36. The eastern extension of the Jubilee line is the only Underground line
to feature glass screens to deter "jumpers".

Though they're actually there to control air flow.

48. The first crash on the Tube occurred in 1938 when two trains collided
between Waterloo and Charing Cross, injuring 12 passengers.

I'd be surprised if that was the first one, but I can't be bothered to
research further.

70. The first section of the Underground ran between Paddington (Bishop's
Road) and Farringdon Street. The same section now forms part of the Circle,
Hammersmith & City, and Metropolitan lines.

Not the Met.

71.The Underground was first used for air raid shelters in September 1940.

There was some sheltering, albeit unofficial, in WW1.

147. A 2011 study suggested 30 per cent of passengers take longer routes
due to the out-of-scale distances on the Tube map.

I'm very skeptical of that claim.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In message , Roland Perry
wrote:
Really? Only 3.89?

I personally thought that it was longer than 3.89.

Google maps says it's 4.1 miles by the slightly indirect road.

6.35km according to official measurements.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

We were about to embark at Dover, when
(Recliner) came up to me and whispered:

Yes, but the London Underground (and the "Tube") is understood
to include the predecessor companies.

The entity known as London Underground now, the forerunner of which was
London Electric Railways (clue in the name) did not run steam services.

The Metropolitan Railway was always an independent line until 1933, when
it was finally subsumed. LER (London Underground, or "the Tube") never
ran underground steam services.

And anyway, technically, the first underground service was run not by LUL
or it's forerunners, but by FGW and it's forerunners.

If you only include the Met, then even the original 1863 route
isn't all part of the current Met line,

No, but it is part of the Hammersmith and City, so that is the "line"
that is celebrating it's 150th.

and so you presumably regard the upcoming steam runs as
bogus?

To a certain extent, ALL steam runs on commercial lines are now "bogus" -
doesn't stop them being either newsworthy or fun.


--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

We were about to embark at Dover, when
(Recliner) came up to me and whispered:

Otherwise, which entity is celebrating its 150th anniversary?
If you only include the Met, then even the original 1863 route
isn't all part of the current Met line

On that basis, surely the "Tube" is 157 years old, as parts of the
Central Line were first operated in 1856.

Or perhaps you would prefer it to be 1858, the start date of service over
part of the Hammersmith and City?

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

Paul Cummins wrote:
We were about to embark at Dover, when
(Recliner) came up to me and whispered:

Yes, but the London Underground (and the "Tube") is understood
to include the predecessor companies.

The entity known as London Underground now, the forerunner of which was
London Electric Railways (clue in the name) did not run steam services.

The Metropolitan Railway was always an independent line until 1933, when
it was finally subsumed. LER (London Underground, or "the Tube") never
ran underground steam services.

And anyway, technically, the first underground service was run not by LUL
or it's forerunners, but by FGW and it's forerunners.

If you only include the Met, then even the original 1863 route
isn't all part of the current Met line,

No, but it is part of the Hammersmith and City, so that is the "line"
that is celebrating it's 150th.

and so you presumably regard the upcoming steam runs as
bogus?

To a certain extent, ALL steam runs on commercial lines are now "bogus" -
doesn't stop them being either newsworthy or fun.

If you're going to be super pedantic, perhaps you'd also like to get your
apostrophes right? I count several errors. And, yes, the original Met
counts as one of the parents of today's Underground.

We were about to embark at Dover, when
(Recliner) came up to me and whispered:

And, yes, the original Met
counts as one of the parents of today's Underground.

They they are seven years late.

The first trains ran on what is now the Central Line in 1856.

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

Paul Cummins wrote:
We were about to embark at Dover, when
(Recliner) came up to me and whispered:

And, yes, the original Met
counts as one of the parents of today's Underground.

They they are seven years late.

The first trains ran on what is now the Central Line in 1856.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. Are you seriously suggesting
they should have celebrated the 150th anniversary of a bit of unimportant
Essex railway seven years ago?

In message , Clive D. W. Feather
wrote:
6. Many tube stations were used as air-raid shelters during the Second
World War, but the Central Line was even converted into a fighter aircraft
factory that stretched for over two miles, with its own railway system. Its
existence remained an official secret until the 1980s.

That would be why it's mentioned in the 1947 "A History of London
Transport", then.

Typo: that should have said "1974".

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In message , at 23:14:54 on Thu, 10
Jan 2013, Clive D. W. Feather remarked:
Really? Only 3.89?

I personally thought that it was longer than 3.89.

Google maps says it's 4.1 miles by the slightly indirect road.

6.35km according to official measurements.

I assume you mean the railway, not the road.

So that's 3.95 miles. Is the 0.06 mile (about 320ft) something to do
with which end of the platform they are measuring from?
--
Roland Perry